Similarly, I had a pair of swordbrothers who took their devotion to the truth and following their code of honour to extrodinary lengths and to the great embarassment of the others. All three were better but not necessarily far superior to the others in combat, what made them scary was the fact that they would go the full fiften rounds often over nothing at all. The dedication of the two players whose characters they were, to moving the story forward not just causing trouble, was what allowed them to fit into the flow of the gaming.
Regards,
Harry Sigerson
Mikko Rintasaari wrote:
>On Fri, 14 Jun 2002, andyhoward39 wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>Like a lot of extreme archetypes, I think Humakt has an attractive
>>mystique as a concept. But I'd like to see a player run a proper
>>Humakti (or Uroxi berserker, for that matter) as a "psychopathic and
>>dangerous fanatic" for once, rather than a bloke with superior combat
>>abilities.
>>
>
>Uh, my game has an example of both. One of each is quite enough, and
>neither is a character in any regular group game. Both have very nearly
>killed another character (same one! different occasions) for very minor,
>or no reason (mostly for assuming he was dealing with normal people).
>
> -Adept
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Powered by hypermail